Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles R who wrote (62181)	6/17/1999 5:39:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1571443

<Also, Intel's cost structure would take a serious shock - just pick a number of Coppermines that would have shipped in Q4 and compute the dollars that Intel would be not gaining by shipping PIII catridges. All this does not even consider the speed grade issue.> What? The socket version of Coppermine wasn't due until October 24 anyway. Besides, the cost savings of removing the SECC2 (that half-naked Nintendo cartridge) would have been $15 to $20. Big deal. By the way, people, it's interesting to note that Tom's Hardware Guide already said that a 600 MHz Katmai (Pentium III on 0.25 micron process) is coming on August 1st, perhaps in response to the 600 MHz K7: www6.tomshardware.com This version of the roadmap didn't even take into account the Coppermine slip, so apparently the 600 MHz Katmai was already planned for August before the slip was announced. <And, this in the best selling quarter of the year!> Normally, I'd agree with you, but there is that issue of Y2K ... Perhaps that's another reason why Kash suggested pushing Coppermine out to January of 2000. <I would expect AMD to pick up a lots of K7 design wins - I mean LOTS.> That nice, but how is AMD going to satisfy the demand for all these design wins? It'll take a while before K7 production really gets going, so the best thing for AMD is to keep the supply of K7s limited and the prices high in the beginning. Tenchusatsu

To: Charles R who wrote (62181)	6/17/1999 5:40:00 PM
From: kash johal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571443

Charles, Re: >Christmas is already out. There is no way a OEM (with the possible >exception of Dell) would risk Coppermine for this Christmas season >with the current schedule. There are plenty of folks who want the best parts from Intel. So if the best is a 600Mhz PIII then lots of folks will buy it. Low volumes of Coppermine that they can't get may cause them to delay purchases altogether till Q1 2000. >I would expect AMD to pick up a lots of K7 design wins - I mean LOTS. AMD's problems will not be designs ins. If they yield 600Mhz K7's they will sell all they can yield for Q4 99. >Also, Intel's cost structure would take a serious shock - just pick >a number of Coppermines that would have shipped in Q4 and compute >the dollars that Intel would be not gaining by shipping PIII >catridges. All this does not even consider the speed grade issue. Yes, the margins may well suffer - but remember that Cyrix will be out of inventory and AMD will be fab limited so pricing pressure will be minimal. >And, this in the best selling quarter of the year! Yes, looks good for AMD and Intel!!! >So, I am not sure why you say it is not a big deal. Can you explain >(and knock my arguments down as necessary)? Actually IMHO the big thing may be that there are speed problems with 0.18 micron. These may take much much longer than 2 months to fix. If they change their transisitors they will need to requalify the process and thats a 3-6 month task right there. So they may get the margin gains of the smaller die but the ASP's will suffer. Regards, Kash

To: Charles R who wrote (62181)	6/17/1999 5:46:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571443

Charles- <I would expect AMD to pick up a lots of K7 design wins - I mean LOTS.> I believe the chipset support issues for K7 would have to look significantly more positive by end of Q3. Volume is still a major question with the K7. I can think of other scenarios also, that have to do with Intel responses that you have not considered. PB

To: Charles R who wrote (62181)	6/18/1999 12:18:00 AM
From: kapkan4u	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571443

<Chuck - re: Also, Intel's cost structure would take a serious shock - just pick a number of Coppermines that would have shipped in Q4 and compute the dollars that Intel would be not gaining by shipping PIII catridges. All this does not even consider the speed grade issue.> How about the costs of converting four FABS to 0.18u and have them wait for the process to be re-qualified? And in addition the conversion to 0.18u is taking capacity away from 0.25u which apparently they will need back now to continue to build PeeIIIs for three or more month. So now they have to convert some capacity back to 0.25u. This makes FDIV look like a walk in the park IMHO. Kap.